What should a community/nation/state (government) provide for citizens?

henry quirk • Aug 1, 2018 12:38 pm
nada

police

courts

military

roads

fire protection

education

limited housing

limited healthcare

retirement insurance

unemployment insurance

universal healthcare

food

housing

clothing

energy


Copy only the items you think should be provided and paste them into your response field.

Explain your choices as little or as much as you like.
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 1, 2018 11:02 pm
police
courts ---- Judicial system

military ---Defense only

roads
fire protection
education

retirement insurance--- Social Security

unemployment insurance--- Self Funding

food
housing
clothing------ Temporary Emergency Situations

universal healthcare-- Government run single payer system -- The heavily funded by the libertarian Koch family Mercatus Center says Medicare-for-All would save us $2.054 TRILLION in 10 years.
Undertoad • Aug 1, 2018 11:55 pm
any of the above that a fairly-elected representative government decides should be managed that way
glatt • Aug 2, 2018 8:44 am
And other stuff too, like regulating public resources for the greatest good for individuals.
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 2, 2018 10:25 am
glatt;1012617 wrote:
And other stuff too, like regulating public resources for the greatest good for individuals.


Public resources? Do you mean like petroleum, natural gas, minerals, timber, water, etc? :confused:
glatt • Aug 2, 2018 11:48 am
Yes. And radio frequencies, etc.

Let's say there is a new colony located at the base of a forest covered mountain. It's very Henry Quirkish where the government just lets people be. And the townsfolk need firewood, so each day the fair citizens go up into the foothills and cut down some trees. After a while, the forest has receded, and the mudslides begin, wiping out the town below. If they had a government regulating how much wood could be taken, and how, the forest could be sustained and also provide some lumber/firewood, and the town doesn't get buried in the mudslide. It's the kind of thing you need a government to control because left to their own devices, each person is going to think that surely cutting down this one tree today for myself isn't going to be a problem.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 12:53 pm
Glatt,

You describe a 'tragedy of the commons'.

Consider: a new colony located at the base of a forest covered mountain. There is no formal governmrnt and each colonist is a self-directing type.

Immediately folks get to claiming property left and right. Of course there'll be skirmishes and jumped claims and bloodshed, but once the dust settles there won't be a 'commons'.

The self-regulation of such an arrangement, I think, is superior to regulation from the outside (or 'above').
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 1:21 pm
...for everyone, I'm guessin'.

What's the 'cost' of such a thing?
Happy Monkey • Aug 2, 2018 1:39 pm
henry quirk;1012631 wrote:

Immediately folks get to claiming property left and right. Of course there'll be skirmishes and jumped claims and bloodshed, but once the dust settles there won't be a 'commons'.

The self-regulation of such an arrangement, I think, is superior to regulation from the outside (or 'above').
It's substantially inferior, even setting aside bloodshed vs. law, and the dubious concept of "when the dust settles".
"The commons" is not just "unclaimed land". It is also "the forest" that covers all the land parcels. It is in everyone's interest for the forest to be healthy, but it's in each individual's interest to exploit it in their preferred way. If too many of them sell off their lumber, a mudslide takes them all out.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 2:03 pm
"It's substantially inferior"

I disagree.

#

"It's in each individual's interest for the forest to be healthy and used wisely."

Yep.
glatt • Aug 2, 2018 2:13 pm
henry quirk;1012635 wrote:
"It's in each individual's interest for the forest to be healthy and used wisely."

Yep.


Left to their own devices, people time and time again act in a greedy way to get ahead at the expense of society.
[ATTACH]64476[/ATTACH]
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 2:33 pm
"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind" -Frederic Bastiat
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 2, 2018 3:34 pm
henry quirk;1012633 wrote:
...for everyone, I'm guessin'.

What's the 'cost' of such a thing?

Cost of everything? For health care, $2 Trillion less than we spend now, for the rest, a lot less than the cost of not having them.

henry quirk;1012637 wrote:
"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind" -Frederic Bastiat


Theoretically, an individual decides between himself and others, whereas the legislator deciding between doing what's best for everyone or a few, with no(or very little) skin in the game.
Diaphone Jim • Aug 2, 2018 4:04 pm
http://www.worldometers.info/

There 7,640,184,300 (and counting) people on earth.
Climate change is increasing exponentially.
Food, water and air supplies are stretched to breaking.

The questions henry asks come way too late.
The biosphere is toast.
Undertoad • Aug 2, 2018 4:38 pm
"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good?"

Because in a proper representative government, we the people are the organizers.
Happy Monkey • Aug 2, 2018 6:08 pm
Happy Monkey;1012634 wrote:
It is in everyone's interest for the forest to be healthy, but it's in each individual's interest to exploit it in their preferred way.
henry quirk;1012635 wrote:

"It's in each individual's interest for the forest to be healthy and used wisely."
Yep.
Those are not equivalent in the real world. Immediate individual interests beat out everyone's long-term interest frequently. The landslide is in the future, cash in hand is now.


Even if an individual does value the long-term well-being of them and their children over a quick buck, if they see their neighbors making quick bucks, and making the landslide inevitable anyway, they may find it rational to make their own quick bucks, in hopes of minimizing the pain. To actually prevent the landslide, an agreement has to be made across the mountain. That agreement and its enforcement mechanism is, writ large across the countless similar situations in the world, government.


But that's really just a restatement of the tragedy of the commons. My point is that it doesn't just apply to stuff that nobody owns.

henry quirk;1012637 wrote:
"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind" -Frederic Bastiat
It is indisputable that it is not safe to permit EVERYBODY to be free to do whatever they want. If the organizer sets up a dictatorship, or caste or feudal system, then they think themselves made of a finer clay. If they set up a democracy, they hope that people as a whole are of fine clay, and are able to use the tools that only government can provide to deal with the individuals who aren't, even if they are a member of the government itself.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 7:08 pm
"Cost of everything? For health care, $2 Trillion less than we spend now, for the rest, a lot less than the cost of not having them."

I'm thinkin' more of the 'cost' of 'from each, according to ability; to each, according to need'. No doubt some folks will gladly pay up for such a deal, thin-blooded creatures thay are, happy to have 'need' satisfied.

Everyone 'needs', yeah?

Let's not forget, however, about the (slave) labor required to satisfy all that 'need'. As Glatt sez, 'people time and time again act in a greedy way to get ahead at the expense of society'. The greedy rich, the greedy poor, both want the same thing: that which doesn't belong to them.

You ready to serve, to pay the incalculable 'cost'?

Mebbe you are...good on you, you selfless piece of meat.

#

"Theoretically, an individual decides between himself and others, whereas the legislator deciding between doing what's best for everyone or a few, with no(or very little) skin in the game."

Seems to me: inevitably, the legislator serves his own best interest, just like everyone else.

Put your 'faith' in 'you', is my advice (or squander it on 'finer clay' [if you can find it]).
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 7:10 pm
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 7:22 pm
Is that what we have, toad?

Can you can point to a time when we (or anyone) had such a 'fine' thing?

I look at your rep gov, your democracy, and I see grasping hands barely kept in check by other, equally grasping, hands.

You enshrine the grasping hands of 'the mob', claim it's 'proper' cuz 'we the people are the organizers'...more of that 'finer clay'.

Be careful what you wish for.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 7:32 pm
"It is indisputable that it is not safe to permit EVERYBODY to be free to do whatever they want."

And who sorts that out, separates the wheat from the chaff?

The 'finer clay'.

Faith.
Undertoad • Aug 2, 2018 8:39 pm
henry quirk;1012653 wrote:
Is that what we have, toad?


Yes.

I look at your rep gov, your democracy, and I see grasping hands barely kept in check by other, equally grasping, hands.


By design.

You enshrine the grasping hands of 'the mob', claim it's 'proper' cuz 'we the people are the organizers'...more of that 'finer clay'.


Yes I do. It's We The People. It's us man. You and me. Same clay in every person.

The best way is to let everyone vote. The people form their own government. Constitutionally limited with super-majorities required for major changes. That is ideal. Anything else is unthinkable, really.

How great an idea was that? It's amazingly stable. Here's a list of sovereign nations by their date of formation. By birth of current form of government or establishment of sovereignty, the US is the 2nd oldest. It's behind San Marino.
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 2, 2018 10:28 pm
henry quirk;1012651 wrote:

I'm thinkin' more of the 'cost' of 'from each, according to ability; to each, according to need'. No doubt some folks will gladly pay up for such a deal, thin-blooded creatures thay are, happy to have 'need' satisfied.

Although it weebled and wobbled for 200 years, our government pretty much worked that way until Reagan. Then "We the People" stopped participating and let special interests gobble congress.

Let's not forget, however, about the (slave) labor required to satisfy all that 'need'. As Glatt sez, 'people time and time again act in a greedy way to get ahead at the expense of society'. The greedy rich, the greedy poor, both want the same thing: that which doesn't belong to them.

In places like Scandinavia they pay around half their pay in taxes. Recoil in horror, make the sign of the cross, wear garlic, load the guns Ma.
But wait, what do they get for that exorbitant fee? Can you say everything, boys and girls? Everything they need plus the lack of worry about ever needing. Maybe that's a good deal. ;)


Put your 'faith' in 'you', is my advice (or squander it on 'finer clay' [if you can find it]).

If I put my faith in me I will have to settle for less because even my best efforts are a pisshole in a snowbank compared to the power of the collective we.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 10:33 pm
I'm all for the nightwatchman, toad.

But what we got now is far beyond the minimum and narrow night watchman, all-embracing, all-encompassing, all-smothering is what we live under now

'The People': a vast throng, a herd, a sea of flesh to drown in.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 10:37 pm
"If I put my faith in me I will have to settle for less because even my best efforts are a pisshole in a snowbank compared to the power of the collective we."

...I give up.
Undertoad • Aug 2, 2018 10:50 pm
Naw. It's not bad. You can visit many fine national monuments and take as many photographs as you like. Most people are honest and friendly.

They opened a casino near me, although I don't go that often. Some people get weed legally now! I think New Jersey will have legal weed next. And, they finally allowed wine sales in grocery stores in my state last year.

Pretty much everyone has a job who wants one, except my friend Jeff who has a criminal record. I don't know what Jeff is going to do but he does keep active on Facebook.
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 2, 2018 10:54 pm
You just won't admit the community will raise a better barn, faster that you could ever do it on your own. :facepalm:

You present somebody with a possible explanation for that 131 temperature in Death Valley as rebuttal to Diaphone Jims reference to Global Warming. Tell that to the Polar Bears, Siberians, and Inuits watching the Arctic melt.

You have even resorted to mildly derogatory name calling of people who disagree with you. I'm sure that's out of frustration that we sheep can't see the light, but I think that frustration stems from your inability to see the value of community and government. :grouphug:

Even John Wayne and Billy The Kid needed help.
henry quirk • Aug 2, 2018 11:12 pm
"You just won't admit the community will raise a better barn, faster that you could ever do it on your own."

Missing my point, Bruce, not by choice, I think.

You're just incapable of seein' outside the collective.

That's okay...you do what you need to...trust me, I will.

#

"You present somebody with a possible explanation for that 131 temperature in Death Valley as rebuttal to Diaphone Jims reference to Global Warming. Tell that to the Polar Bears, Siberians, and Inuits watching the Arctic melt."

No, I offered up the whole site, not any one article...there's a lot there...read (or not) as you like.

#

"Even John Wayne and Billy The Kid needed help."

From cohorts, cronies, and friends, not mandated from on high.

meh

'nuff said.
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 2, 2018 11:41 pm
Don't you see that American style government working the way it should allows the hermit, rugged individual, and oddball to do there own thing, especially if you get out of the suburbs. You can get away with it in the city, but way better in the small towns which are plentiful.

I had half a dozen cars in my yard, none on blocks, but in various states of repair. The local Republican thugs went apeshit and made all kinds of threats, but the PA Supreme Court said hey you bullies, leave that boy alone. The system usually works.
henry quirk • Aug 3, 2018 9:16 am
"Don't you see that American style government working the way it should allows the hermit, rugged individual, and oddball to do there own thing"

An American minarchy would do it better, but that's not allowed.
Clodfobble • Aug 3, 2018 9:56 am
Undertoad wrote:
Pretty much everyone has a job who wants one


Ehh... kinda. There's a whole ton of people right now with only 32-hour/week jobs because no one wants to provide healthcare. My stepdaughter straight up told her employer, "I'm on my parents' plan, I'll sign whatever you need to get around it, please just give me more hours and skip the healthcare" and they said no. Plus, minimum wage is not currently high enough to pay rent-with-roommates, at least in our area, and the gig economy has people constantly worrying where their next deposit is coming from, which is not a mental state a lot of people can handle.

I'm optimistic. I think in another couple of years we'll have single-payer, and a boost in the minimum wage. What would really help is if they'd finally tack minimum wage to inflation and a regional economic benchmark, so it could be different in Topeka vs. NYC but still increased automatically without this painful legislative back-and-forth every few years.
Happy Monkey • Aug 3, 2018 11:29 am
henry quirk;1012654 wrote:
"It is indisputable that it is not safe to permit EVERYBODY to be free to do whatever they want."

And who sorts that out, separates the wheat from the chaff?
The rest of the paragraph.
Happy Monkey • Aug 3, 2018 11:38 am
henry quirk;1012667 wrote:

"Even John Wayne and Billy The Kid needed help."

From cohorts, cronies, and friends, not mandated from on high.

meh

'nuff said.
All the frontier towns relied on connections back to civilization to do anything more than subsist. They weren't outside, they were on the fringe.


And "the dust settled" when government reached them.
Happy Monkey • Aug 3, 2018 11:39 am
Clodfobble;1012678 wrote:
What would really help is if they'd finally tack minimum wage to inflation and a regional economic benchmark, so it could be different in Topeka vs. NYC but still increased automatically without this painful legislative back-and-forth every few years.

I wish it was few.
henry quirk • Aug 3, 2018 1:09 pm
Happy,

You're comfortable being governed (regulated and directed): good on you.

I'm not.

Let's just leave it at that.
glatt • Aug 3, 2018 1:53 pm
henry quirk;1012689 wrote:
Let's just leave it at that.


And here I thought you started this thread to discuss ideas.
henry quirk • Aug 3, 2018 2:16 pm
Why I started the thread is my business, as your participation in the thread is yours.

Read my opening post: the request is simple, direct, and does not include any promise of 'discussion'.

Disappointing, yes (cuz I'm such a lively conversationalist, witty and compelling), but it shouldn't be surprising (cuz, at heart, I'm a [witty and compelling] bastid).
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 3, 2018 8:06 pm
On the upside, a minarchy would make a huge cut in air pollution which would slow global warming, climate change. and increasingly severe weather.
Since there wouldn't be any roads suitable for more than horses and mules, all the cars and trucks would be parked. It would also advance science developing flying cars.
henry quirk • Aug 3, 2018 9:12 pm
:question:
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 4, 2018 1:31 am
I've had horses with the hay pitching and shit shoveling that goes with it.
Done plenty of walking too... uphill both ways some times. Fuck that.
This is the way I want to see that shit.
Undertoad • Aug 4, 2018 10:43 am
a minarchy would make a huge cut in air pollution


~ no ~

From what I read, burning wood and dung is probably carbon-neutral (depending on what you do with the forests to get that wood; historically, we just cut it all down) but creates more pollutants, which make life unlivable locally. And creates airborne black carbon soot which harms, amongst other things, the Arctic ice and which many people consider responsible for a good bit of climate change too. It's not sustainable for 7 Billion people.


"Our future if we treat climate change as the only problem that needs solving: more climate change"
henry quirk • Aug 4, 2018 12:51 pm
"I've had horses with the hay pitching and shit shoveling that goes with it. Done plenty of walking too... uphill both ways some times."

Me too, then and now.

Me: I enjoy the effort.

*shrug*

No worries, Bruce, there's never gonna be a 'night watchman' or a Golgothan-style anarchy in America.

Far too many want to be governed (regulated & directed) and far too many are more than happy to govern (regulate & direct).

No, your future is secure...you'll be well-tended to, provided for, sheltered, insulated, 'educated & entertained'.

Good on you.
xoxoxoBruce • Aug 4, 2018 9:34 pm
Undertoad;1012736 wrote:
~ no ~

From what I read, burning wood and dung is probably carbon-neutral (depending on what you do with the forests to get that wood; historically, we just cut it all down) but creates more pollutants, which make life unlivable locally. And creates airborne black carbon soot which harms, amongst other things, the Arctic ice and which many people consider responsible for a good bit of climate change too. It's not sustainable for 7 Billion people.

Wouldn't happen because at least the country would starve to death before that happens.

henry quirk;1012743 wrote:
"I've had horses with the hay pitching and shit shoveling that goes with it. Done plenty of walking too... uphill both ways some times."

Me too, then and now.

Me: I enjoy the effort.

*shrug*

No worries, Bruce, there's never gonna be a 'night watchman' or a Golgothan-style anarchy in America.

Far too many want to be governed (regulated & directed) and far too many are more than happy to govern (regulate & direct).

No, your future is secure...you'll be well-tended to, provided for, sheltered, insulated, 'educated & entertained'.

Good on you.
I'm not worrying about that happening here, I was just thinking about what it would be like in your minarchy. I ain't scart. :haha:
henry quirk • Aug 5, 2018 12:52 pm
Of course not, for the reasons I laid out above.